| Users Online Now: 1,238 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 357,942 | |
| Pageviews Today: 466,198 | Threads Today: 152 | Posts Today: 1,718 |
| 04:03 AM | ||
| Users Online Now: 1,238 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 357,942 | |
| Pageviews Today: 466,198 | Threads Today: 152 | Posts Today: 1,718 |
| 04:03 AM | ||
Federal judge in Maryland rules Trump had the right to end DACA in win for administration | |
| Bread Crumb
Offer Upgrade  User ID: 75264682  United States03/06/2018 03:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Bread Crumb
(OP) User ID: 75264682 United States03/06/2018 03:13 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | From the article The Maryland judge's decision is expected to give the Department of Justice more support in its appeals that the administration was justified in ending DACA. The truth is hate speech to those who hate truth |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 76330885  Canada03/06/2018 03:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | A federal judge in Maryland has sided with the Trump administration over a lawsuit challenging the Justice Department's ability to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Quoting: Bread Crumb Judge Roger W. Titus, a Bush appointee, ruled late Monday President Trump acted within his authority in his plan to rescind an executive order former President Barack Obama announced in 2012 as a way to protect illegal immigrants who were brought to the United States as minors. Trump ended the order over a period of six months until Congress could legislatively solve the problem. Read the ruling here - [link to www.washingtonexaminer.com] how could he not have the right when a former president had the right to set this up? why did it cost this much money and time to determine this? |
| Bread Crumb
(OP) User ID: 75264682 United States03/06/2018 03:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | DHS’s rationale provided in the DACA Rescission Memo was a belief, based on recent court decisions and the advice of the Attorney General, that DACA was unlawful. Assuming that a reasonable basis for that belief exists in the Administrative Record, how could trying to avoid unlawful action possibly be arbitrary and capricious? Quite simply, it cannot. Regardless of whether DACA is, in fact, lawful or unlawful, the belief that it was unlawful and subject to serious legal challenge is completely rational. The truth is hate speech to those who hate truth |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 22318 United States03/06/2018 03:45 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | A federal judge in Maryland has sided with the Trump administration over a lawsuit challenging the Justice Department's ability to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Quoting: Bread Crumb Judge Roger W. Titus, a Bush appointee, ruled late Monday President Trump acted within his authority in his plan to rescind an executive order former President Barack Obama announced in 2012 as a way to protect illegal immigrants who were brought to the United States as minors. Trump ended the order over a period of six months until Congress could legislatively solve the problem. Read the ruling here - [link to www.washingtonexaminer.com] how could he not have the right when a former president had the right to set this up? why did it cost this much money and time to determine this? The 4th Circuit judge (not the one today) said Trump has the right to end it, but not for the reason given, and therefore Trump can't use that reason to end it. Today's decision in another circuit should kill off that ridiculous idea. |
| Bread Crumb
(OP) User ID: 75264682 United States03/06/2018 03:52 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | A federal judge in Maryland has sided with the Trump administration over a lawsuit challenging the Justice Department's ability to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Quoting: Bread Crumb Judge Roger W. Titus, a Bush appointee, ruled late Monday President Trump acted within his authority in his plan to rescind an executive order former President Barack Obama announced in 2012 as a way to protect illegal immigrants who were brought to the United States as minors. Trump ended the order over a period of six months until Congress could legislatively solve the problem. Read the ruling here - [link to www.washingtonexaminer.com] how could he not have the right when a former president had the right to set this up? why did it cost this much money and time to determine this? The 4th Circuit judge (not the one today) said Trump has the right to end it, but not for the reason given, and therefore Trump can't use that reason to end it. Today's decision in another circuit should kill off that ridiculous idea. Its amazing that an illegal EO issues by Obama is able to stand yet when Trump attempts to end this program activist judges prevent him from doing so. Nobody is against legal immigration but the media distorts the terminology making it sound that those against illegal immigration are against all immigration. The truth is hate speech to those who hate truth |
